Although the rule prohibits some kinds of testing and limits others,
it is riddled with loopholes that undermine its effectiveness and ultimately
encourage more human testing, the coalition groups say. The rule also
fails to ensure that pesticide testing on human subjects meets the strictest
scientific and ethical standards recommended by a 2004
National Academy of Sciences report and outlined in the Nuremberg
Code after World War II.

The chemical industry concedes that its goal is to weaken safety standards
by circumventing the margin of safety the EPA uses to estimate a safe
human exposure level based on animal studies. As a result of the agency's
illegal rule, the EPA will rely on unethical and unscientific human
pesticide tests to weaken regulatory standards, the groups charge.

There have been serious ethical and scientific problems with such tests
in the past. For example, a company told participants in one test they
were eating vitamins, not toxic pesticides. In many other tests, companies
have not provided any long-term follow-up to protect participants' health.

The Clinton administration banned the EPA from relying on the results
of such tests because of their questionable scientific and ethical integrity.
The Bush administration at first ratified the Clinton-era moratorium,
but then lifted the ban. Congress reimposed it in 2005, pending finalization
of stricter rules.

"The EPA's rule puts pesticide companies' profits ahead of human
health and scientific integrity," said Dr. Robert Gould, a pathologist
and president of San Francisco Bay Area Physicians for Social Responsibility.
"Pesticide companies should not be allowed to take advantage of
vulnerable populations by enticing people to serve as human laboratory
rats."

Erik Olson, a senior attorney with the Natural
Resources Defense Council (NRDC), agreed. "The industry's human
pesticide tests are unscientific and unethical," Olson said. "Their
record of abuse is appalling, yet the EPA disregards Congress' order
to crack down on this abhorrent practice."

"Unethical testing of pesticides on humans is wrong and has to
be stopped," said Jan Hasselman, an attorney with Earthjustice
representing the groups in the lawsuit. "EPA's rule ignores Congress
and allows unethical human tests to be used to weaken pesticide regulations."